If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. Register yourself as a member of Eyes on Final Fantasy in order to post, have less ads, be able to read more thread replies per page, and much much more. Click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Yoshinori Kitase shuts down "Squall is Dead", other fan theories

In a recent interview with Kotaku, Final Fantasy Producer Yoshinori Kitase responded to popular fan theories while promoting Mobius Final Fantasy at PAX West. Among the most popular topics discussed in video game forums and the internet at large over the years, two of the biggest fan theories have revolved around Final Fantasy VIII.

On the theory that Final Fantasy VIII’s Squall dies at the end of Disc 1 when he’s stabbed by Edea’s ice spear and that the rest of the game is his dream:

“No, that is not true,” Kitase said, laughing. “I think he was actually stabbed around the shoulder area, so he was not dead. But that is a very interesting idea, so if we ever do make a remake of Final Fantasy VIII, I might go along with that story in mind.”

It's worth noting that Squall woke up from this iconic cutscene questioning how he had no wound in the aftermath, so even if you factor in that characters in video games get shot and stabbed by enemies and monsters all the time, it was enough of a plot point to warrant questioning from the protagonist. It looks like you'll have to write it off as being healed by a heavy dose of curaga before his interrogation.

“No, that is not true,” Kitase said. “I don’t think I’ll incorporate that even if we do remake the game. But that being said, both Rinoa and Ultimecia are witches, so in that sense they are similar, but they’re not the same person.”

Given the influence of mind control and time paradoxes in the story, it was only natural that the thoughts of fans would come to consider the implications these would have on the characters. In Dissidia Final Fantasy, the weapons Ultimecia uses have the same name as Rinoa's weapons in the original game. Perhaps this is a developer wink to the fans?

There you have it, everybody. It's worth noting that in both questions, Kitase framed his answers with hypothetical "if we do a remake" scenarios. Never say never, especially if the Final Fantasy VII Remake does well. This gives me a few theories of my own about what the future may hold for Final Fantasy, none of which include being stabbed in the shoulder with an ice spear for wanting a remake of Final Fantasy VIII.

For answers to more theories about other games in the Final Fantasy series, please check out the full article at Kotaku.

R=U is the kind of story twist that would be totally cool in a game set up for it thematically and narratively, which is probably why it gained so much traction in the first place.

It doesn't really fit into FFVIII that way though. The story would focus on entirely different things if it had that kind of dark twist to it. I do appreciate the creativity that went into it though and think it's really cool that it even exists as a theory =P

Squall was actually hit in the upper right area of his chest, not shoulders.

Squall=Dead being a true possibility in the remake just because he likes the idea? Nonsense.

R=U is false? I'm surprised he doesn't like this idea because this theme is not very uncommon in Japanese culture.

X sharing the same universe as 7's? Blasphemy and utterly stupid.

Fake, which it probably is, or not it very well be the Creator's canon. But I (or you) don't have to reinterpret everything just based on what he said anyway. It'd be pointless and unsatisfying.

Originally Posted by Lone Wolf Leonhart

In Dissidia Final Fantasy, the weapons Ultimecia uses have the same name as Rinoa's weapons in the original game. Perhaps this is a developer wink to the fans?

No, but before a battle begins, D-Ultimecia saying "Shall we dance?" is a nod to the R=U theory. In retrospect, VIII Rinoa says the same line at the dance party. Also consider that D-Ultimecia is clearly sane in Dissidia, compared to her original Self both in Japanese and English.

I say, screw all these external sources as in being not true canons or retcons, and stick with your true interpretations from the original sources.

Squall was actually hit in the upper right area of his chest, not shoulders.

Squall=Dead being a true possibility in the remake just because he likes the idea? Nonsense.

R=U is false? I'm surprised he doesn't like this idea because this theme is not very uncommon in Japanese culture.

X sharing the same universe as 7's? Blasphemy and utterly stupid.

Fake, which it probably is, or not it very well be the Creator's canon. But I (or you) don't have to reinterpret everything just based on what he said anyway. It'd be pointless and unsatisfying.

Originally Posted by Lone Wolf Leonhart

In Dissidia Final Fantasy, the weapons Ultimecia uses have the same name as Rinoa's weapons in the original game. Perhaps this is a developer wink to the fans?

No, but before a battle begins, D-Ultimecia saying "Shall we dance?" is a nod to the R=U theory. In retrospect, VIII Rinoa says the same line at the dance party. Also consider that D-Ultimecia is clearly sane in Dissidia, compared to her original Self both in Japanese and English.

I say, screw all these external sources as in being not true canons or retcons, and stick with your true interpretations from the original sources.

I cannot take a single line of this post seriously because either you are trolling or do neither understand the scenario, nor the right you get with your property.

I will not get into another discussion with you about a heavily misunderstood and misused concept that you are trying to bring up everytime whenever you want to ignore the very essence of successful communication, something that has a clear definition and structure in communication psychology or the axiomatic reasoning behind this even without knowing communication psychology.

By the way: I am the author or this post. And what I am saying with this post is what I am saying. I am not saying with this post what you want me to say. You can understand that another way but it will never be the actual message. When I ask "Can you tell me what time it is?" it is up to me to decide if I ask you really for the time or for your capability of telling me, not up to you because disturbance of communication occurs once at least one side does not get what it wants and that will automatically happen by purposely answering with a misleading answer. I can make a mistake my mis-wording what I said so actually increase the chance of misinterpretation. But what I want will always be what I want and no one can actually force me to "have wanted that instead". With property it is even more obvious that multiple rules apply because they are intellectual and legal owners and we are nothing. Nothing at all. Consumers without any rights about the franchise and a misusage of a fan-made concept that is heavily twisted nowadays to act like they can decide canonicity (what Death of the Author never actually was about) will not change anything about that. You do not want this back and forth again or do you? I do not. Live with it and walk away because I will definitely.

Edited the post so it can be read as worded to reflect more reason because hostility is not the drive here and that even though I am annoyed (and can still be seen with the opener) by ad infinitum discussions.

Inconsistency is the problem here, not intellectual property. Compare original fiction with its external sources (interlinked characters' personalities, elements, stories, etc...) and you'll sense so many holes coming from left, right, up, down, forward and backward. But try combining all of that into one and "true" interpretation, your brain may as well start ceasing to exist because you don't know what is real and what isn't, anymore. Hence my suggestion to stick with the original fiction in this case.

If they want to make "quality games," they simply can't play God by writing, re-writing or changing fiction that's nonsensical & contradicting just because they can. Oh, right. They certainly can, because it's thier right and they can do whatever they want. And we don't get a say in it at all. But wait, what about our entertainment rights? Yes, we do. We interpret/play the game and thus our entertainment(s) become fulfilled. The creators have no right to take that away from us. Did we misinterpret which was later corrected by the creator in the future? Well, our entertainment values would be still intact anyway.

The part where I said "fake" was kind of an overstatement but only because I presumed that Kitase's FF8 statements were inconsistent and have contradicted with what actually happened in his own game. Plus, him (on behalf of Nojima?) subtly saying yes to the theory about FF7 and FFX sharing the same universe, all based on one particular FFX-2 cutscene where Shinra says he's researching "pyreflies" and basically turning em into Mako just to light up the cities which would take place in many generations later. Implausibility at its best...

Death of the Author is not about canonicity, nor is it a "fan-made concept". It's a concept that's an integral part of post-modernism, which is a movement far predating fandoms being a thing at all.

What is in the book (or whatever text we're talking about it) is undeniably canon. But every story has elements of ambiguity, and what the author thinks about those points of ambiguity is completely irrelevant, since everyone's interpretation is as valid as theirs at this point. When the work is out there, the author's perspective is but one of many. Even if he claims he has the right (like the creator of the .gif extension regarding its pronounciation), he has no right, really, to change people's perspective on it.